Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Dnyaneshwar Gangadhar, was convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for attempting to murder Ranjit Patil (PW8) on 7 March 2004 at Gevrai. The appellant, along with co-accused Raju Mote and absconding accused Sheru Mote, attacked the complainant with a Rampuri knife, sword, and iron bar due to rivalry between their clubs. The complainant sustained two knife blows on his left ribcage and below the left armpit, causing grievous injuries. The trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000. The co-accused were acquitted. The appellant appealed, challenging the conviction. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the injured complainant (PW8), eyewitnesses (PW1, PW2), and the medical officer (PW7) who confirmed the injuries were grievous and dangerous to life. The court found the prosecution case credible and upheld the conviction, dismissing the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on eyewitness testimony and medical evidence - The appellant, along with co-accused, attacked the complainant with a knife, causing grievous injuries on vital parts. The court held that the intention to cause death was evident from the nature of injuries and the weapon used, and the conviction was upheld. (Paras 1-3)
B) Evidence Law - Corroboration - Medical Evidence - The testimony of the injured eyewitness (PW8) was corroborated by the medical evidence (PW7) which described the injuries as grievous and dangerous to life. The court held that such corroboration strengthens the prosecution case. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for attempting to murder the complainant by inflicting knife blows is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are upheld.
Law Points
- Section 307 IPC
- attempt to murder
- intention to cause death
- grievous injury
- corroboration of medical evidence
- eyewitness testimony
- common intention
- Section 34 IPC
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (03) 1
Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2006
Shri R.N. Dhorde, Senior Advocate with Adv. Pravin G. Patil i/b Shri V.R. Dhorde for appellant; Shri D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for respondent
Dnyaneshwar s/o Ramnath Gangadhar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for attempt to murder
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought quashment of conviction and sentence under Section 307 IPC
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted for attempting to murder the complainant due to club rivalry
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted appellant and sentenced to 5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000; co-accused acquitted
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 307 IPC is sustainable based on evidence
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient and that the conviction was erroneous
Respondent argued that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt through eyewitness and medical evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The intention to cause death can be inferred from the nature of injuries inflicted on vital parts of the body with a dangerous weapon, and such intention is corroborated by medical evidence and eyewitness testimony.
Judgment Excerpts
Challenge in this appeal is to the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant herein, by way of judgment and order, dated 29.12.2005, rendered by the learned 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, in Sessions Case No. 45 of 2005.
It appears that the appellant herein was charged for the offence punishable under Section 307 independently and also r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code along with the co accused and faced the trial...
The factual matrix of the present case is as follows : The complainant, namely Ranjit Shankarrao Patil i.e. PW8 was running a club at Gevrai at the relevant time.
Procedural History
The appellant was tried in Sessions Case No. 45 of 2005 before the 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, convicted under Section 307 IPC on 29.12.2005, and sentenced to 5 years RI and fine. He appealed to the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) in Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2006, which was dismissed on 14.3.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 307, 34
